1. Field of the Invention
The present invention generally relates to reactive armor, and in particular, to a propelled impacter reactive armor.
2. Background Art
Conventional reactive armor structures and systems that are configured to defeat projectile and/or other threats include systems and methods that have been implemented with varying degrees of success since the 1970's. One example of prior art armor can be found in, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,368,660 ('660). As recited in the Abstract, the '660 patent discloses: “A protective arrangement against projectiles is a wall structure formed from a wall layer of explosive material, and at least one additional wall layer covering at least one face of the wall layer of explosive material. The additional wall layer is made of a non-explosive, inert high-density material such as metal. In one embodiment both faces of the explosive wall layer are covered with a layer of inert, non-explosive high-density material such as metal. The protective arrangement is particularly suitable for protection against the destructive force of hollow explosive charge projectiles.”
U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,665,794; 4,981,067; 5,025,707; 5,293,806; 5,637,824; 5,824,941; 6,311,605; 6,345,563; 6,846,372; 7,424,845; 7,540,229; and U.S. Published Applications 2006/0065111; 2006/0162539; and 2009/0173250 also provide additional examples of some conventional protective armoring structures and systems.
However, conventional reactive armor generally presents compromises and limitations in performance, generally manifested as inadequate performance against threats and/or potential hazard to nearby individuals and/or equipment, collateral damage, and the like. In many cases, conventional reactive armors are either too fast reacting or too slow reacting for effective defeat of some threats. For example, conventional reactive armor implementations may react quickly enough to degrade a shaped charge threat, but are spent before the second charge in a tandem charge arrives. In other examples, the conventional reactive armor implementations may be slow, reacting at a rate suitable to effectively degrade a long rod penetrator, but moving too slowly to have good effect on a shaped charge jet. As such, there is a desire for improved reactive armor.